Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHUGH M WOODS PUD - PRELIMINARY - 26-88D - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 1994 STAFF LIAISON: BOB BLANCHARD COUNCIL LIAISON: GINA JANETT The meeting was called to order at 6:34 p.m. by Chairman Rene Clements. Roll Call: Carnes, Bell, Fontane, Clements, Cottier, Strom, Walker. Staff Present: Ludwig, Olt, Ashbeck, Wamhoff, Blanchard, Eckman, Shepard, Herzig, Deines. Agenda Review: Chief Planner Blanchard reviewed the consent and discussion agendas, which included the following items: 1. Minutes of the September 26 and October 24, 1994 Planning Zoning Board Minutes. (Continued) 2. Shepardson Elementary School - Advisory Site Plan Review, #46- 94. 3. Beattie Elementary School - Advisory Site Plan Review, #47-94. 4. Wuerker Residential Addition - NCM Site Plan Review, #48-94. 5. Market Q Horsetooth, Seven Oaks PUD - Final, #96-81P. 6. English Ranch Subdivision, 5th Filing - Preliminary & Final, #75-86P. 7. The Arena PUD, JFK Office - Preliminary and Final, #9-80J. 8. Linden Grove PUD - Preliminary, #49-94. 9. Windtrail Park PUD - Final, #66-93E. 10. Dakota Ridge PUD, Third Filing - Final, #60-91L (Continued). 11. Modifications of Conditions of Final Approval. 12. Resolution PZ94-17 Easement Vacation. 13. Resolution PZ94-18 Easement Vacation, (Withdrawn). Discussion Agenda: 14. Woodland Station PUD - Preliminary, #18-94B. 15. Willow Springs PUD, First Filing - Final, #3-94B (Continued). 16. Hugh M. Woods PUD - Preliminary, #26-88D. 17. Bridgefield PUD - Preliminary, #45-94. (Continued). 18. Spring Creek Farms - Amended Overall Development Plan, #75- 860. 19. Recommendation to City Council Regarding Amendments to the Harmony Corridor Plan and Design Guidelines, #29-90. (Continued until November 21). 20. Recommendation to City Council Regarding Design Guidelines for Large Scale Retail Developments, #54-94. (Continued until November 21). Member Strom moved to hear Spring Creek Farms second on discussion. Member Fontane seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 21 years, and did not think that that necessarily means that that was the best use at this site. She thought that in the past couple of months, they have definitely started talking more about the need for treating the fringes a little differently and, perhaps, lower density. She could go either way on this. She would be hard pressed to deny the request if they were still looking at all the policies that this does meet for where low density should locate, and they were still looking at a density above their minimum of 3, which they did not very often see. She thought in retrospect, they were looking at this ODP again, it would be apparent that perhaps the multi -family area should be away from the fringe and closer to where the high school is and the commercial. But to be consistent with the way the Board has been talking in the past couple of months about lower densities on fringes, better transitions. She supported the request. Member Fontane agreed with Member Cottier that the changes in density and the changes in numbers of units were very small. She was also concerned about neighborhoods who think that having a different housing type in their neighborhood would reduce their quality of life or their property values. That concerned her, and she did not like that. She listened to what Ms. Liley had to say about the difference between density and a variety in housing types, and weighing all the different things and the change in density from 5.8 to 4.02. She thought she could support recommending approval of this. Member Fontane moved for approval of the Spring Creek Farm PUD Amended Overall Development Plan. Member Cottier seconded the motion. The motion was denied 4-3 with Members Walker, Bell, Strom and Clements voting in the negative. Members Carnes, Fontane, Cottier voting for the amendment. HUGE M. WOODS P.U.D. - PRELIMINARY #26-88D. Steve Olt, City Planner gave the staff report recommending approval with the following conditions: 1. That necessary improvements to the Skyway Drive and South College Avenue intersection include a realignment of the Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 22 existing frontage road on the north side of Skyway Drive and west of South College. The realignment of the frontage road will physically impact two existing restaurants, being the Hickory House South and the Deli -Works. Signed agreements between Hugh M. Woods, the Hickory House South, and the Deli - Works, outlining the scope of and obligation for the improvements, must be part of the Final P.U.D. plan submittal to the City. 2. That off -site drainage easements for the Hugh M. Woods development may be necessary to allow release of their stormwater onto and across other properties. Off -site easement dedications for storm drainage, to Hugh M. Woods from affected property owners, must be part of the Final P.U.D. plan submittal to the City. 3. That a design and mitigation plan which is acceptable to the Natural Resources Division be part of the Final P.U.D. plan submittal to the City. The submittal documentation must fully describe the extent of wetland impacts from site development, including both construction and stormwater discharge. The submittal must define the area of construction disturbance for both on -site and off -site wetland areas, and must set forth acceptable strategies, techniques, and costs for the avoidance, alleviation, or mitigation of those impacts. Planner Olt pointed out that prior to the meeting tonight there were changes to the staff recommendation relating to the Findings of Fact for the recommendation. He indicated that it stated that the All Development Criteria in the LDGS have been met except for: 1. A2.1, Vehicular/Pedestrian/Bicycle transportation criteria. 2. A3.1, Utility capacity. 3. A3.2, Design Standards. Based on the fact that there are three critical elements of this plan that had to be conditioned. Member Bell asked about the South asked for clarification of where in/right-out part of the plan. College Access Control Plan. She it is stated regarding the right - Tom Vosburg, Transportation Department replied in the section of the Access Control Plan that lists the west side of College Avenue, 1,000 feet south of Skyway Drive. Member Walker asked about the changes to the frontage road north of the site, and should the road from the parking lot be relocated further west to prevent congestion that might occur. 0 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 23 Mr. Vosburg replied that he concurred with his opinion. The Skyway intersection has a lot of complex issues related to it and the majority of staff time has been focused on the issues presented there. It would be advisable for the intersection of the recirculation road to be further back from the access to College Avenue and that was a relatively minor revision that could be easily accommodated at final without significantly affecting the layout or functionality of the project. Jim Sell, Jim Sell Design, representing the applicant showed slides of the site and surrounding areas. Mr. Sell discussed access, parking, structures, pedestrian access, wetlands, colors, and materials of the site. Mr. Sell showed a perspective in relation to the Weberg building showing the scale and mass of the building, height, width, square footage, canopies, setbacks, and the visual mitigation between Skyway and the commodity display area showing fencing, berming, lighting, and landscaping of the 80 foot buffer. Mr. Sell stated that there will be no loud speakers, they communicate with walkie-talkie communicators. They also do not do any mill work, they will cut wood for people but that would be only 1/2 to 1 hour per day and their saws are located in the building and is located away from the residential development. Mr. Sell discussed drainage and drainage easements. The pattern has been there forever, and it is an existing drainageway on the USGS map. Mr. Sell also discussed the wetlands, where the retaining wall would be located, the two areas that would release into the wetland, and where the runoff from the parking lot would be processed and released. Mr. Sell discussed access to the site. They have met with the property owners to the north, and until an hour ago, thought they would be rerouting traffic between Hickory House and Deli -Works. Currently, the access they have mutually is on an easement through private land in the form of the frontage road. They have three property owners, and in order to access in and out of this property you either have to go through the frontage easement, or traverse across each others property. Earlier this evening they were informed that Deli -Works was no longer interested in an access that would reroute traffic through their property. There would need to be other alternatives looked at to deal with this in a safe way. Member Carnes asked how much cut and fill they would be proposing? Mr. Sell responded a total of about 110,000 square yards. Mr. Sell showed the overall area slide and stated that any warehouse use on this site would have a lot of visual impact. What it will do is buffer the surrounding residential from the activity that occurs. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 24 Member Carnes stated the reason for the question was a neighborhood compatibility criteria which is A2.3, "does the site plan adapt well to the physical characteristics of the site and minimize the disturbance of topography, water bodies, streams, wetlands and wildlife habitats". Mr. Sell responded he thought they were meeting some of those. Member Strom asked for an overview of where they would be cutting and filling? Mr. Sell responded by showing on the site plan, discussing where the cut and fill would be. Member Strom asked if a masonry wall would be put up above the grade. Mr. Sell replied 6 foot high. Member Fontane asked what they would be doing up against the west wall, the drainage swale runs up against it? Mr. Sell pointed out the drainage system for the west wall. Member Bell asked about lighting both on the site and along College Avenue. Mr. Sell pointed out the lighting on the site stating the lights would be attached to the building and shine on the pavement. Parking would be a high box type fixture. Along College Avenue there would be no lighting. Planner Olt added that the lighting along College would be a combination of the City and State, there are standard lighting packages that will be implemented along collector/arterial streets. He was not sure how it works along State Highways. He did not believe it would be Hugh M. Woods. Mike Herzig, Engineering Department added that the level of lighting on streets is a standard in the City's Street Standards and the Light and Power Department of the City is who uses those standards to determine what lighting has to go in. Also, it is the Light and Power Department who installs lights. Member Carnes asked where the stormwater would go after it goes under the highway. Mr. Sell pointed out the direction in which the stormwater would flow. 9 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 25 Member Walker asked what the signage on College Avenue would be on this project. Mr. Sell replied they have not addressed that yet. Member Walker asked about the plan calling for a double left turn with a median and would the frontage road stay where it is in front of Hickory House? He thought that not having the frontage road redirected would cause some complications of what is happening at Skyway Drive. Mr. Sell commented that in order to make if safer, a median is required. To make it a more convenient situation, if will require the cooperation of the property owners to the north and at this point there will have to be additional discussions with them. Tom Vosburg replied he was correct in his assessment of the median solution and the median does create an awkward movement. That would not be the case if the frontage road were realigned. That is why they have encouraged the applicant to work with the property owners to the north to try to achieve a really good solution. Regarding the functional operation of the median, that could be made so it is both safe and legal, but it clearly would be less convenient for the users of the properties to the north. Mr. Vosburg discussed two other alternatives that might be used for access. Member Walker asked if the improvement to Skyway was a result of what this project is bringing to the intersection as far as traffic. Mr. Vosburg replied that was correct. Member Fontane thought that ideally you could circulate through the southern portion of the Hickory House parking lot to get to where the exit is now. Mr. Vosburg pointed out the current exit and stated that if the median was extended you could not recirculate out across from that exit either. Staff has not looked in detail at the median solutions because they were not the one on the table, and there might be a chance to look at some other creative designs with the medians that will make the situations better. Up until a few hours ago, it seemed that the alignment would be what is indicated on the site plan. Member Fontane asked about traffic volume going west on Skyway and onto Constellation to go south. Did he have an idea when the connection between the whole project area would connect over to Trilby Road. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 26 Mr. Vosburg replied he did not have the exact numbers from the traffic study. He has spent sometime with representatives from the neighborhood specifically looking at that issue. Staff does not expect a lot of traffic to head west from here because there is not very much housing out there. Staff was not concerned with the cut through volumes on Constellation being a major issue related to this project. Member Fontane asked if there were concerns raised once this project is built and neighborhoods were concerned volumes had changed, what could be done at that point. They are County street standards and the streets are the responsibility of the homeowners to maintain. Mr. Vosburg replied that was true. The streets were built to County standards and he understands they are in very poor condition and were never accepted by the County for maintenance. The maintenance and upkeep of the streets are the responsibility of the homeowners association. If volumes increased, additional traffic would increase the rate of deterioration. The question would be how much additional traffic in relation to what is currently going on there. Currently the streets are carrying well below the levels we set as urban standards for collector streets. Staff does not expect a substantial increase in traffic associated with this project on those streets. Chairman Clements asked if that had to do with some kind of appropriate upgrade in the intersection, specifically as it surrounds the frontage road? Mr. Vosburg replied that was correct. Chairman Clements thought that this was a major issue concerning this intersection and without a solution to this problem, it will create havoc back to the neighborhood, so it has to be resolved. She was envisioning that without a solution to this problem, people would be cutting through the neighborhood. Mr. Vosburg replied that was correct. Member Carnes asked what staff would see for the frontage road as it comes out from the Hickory House. Mr. Vosburg replied there may be some other alternatives that could be identified. He thought it may still be possible to realign the frontage road through the Hickory House parking lot without utilizing the other lot. There still may be some realignment options. Without the realignment, there would have to be a median and a pork chop island installed on the frontage road to require Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 27 vehicles coming out to head right and dissuade them from attempting to left out of the west bound lane. Member Carnes asked about the safety of the people exiting the frontage road turning right with regard to cars turning off of College onto Skyway Drive. Mr. Vosburg replied that they would be concerned with leaving the frontage free and uncontrolled without a median. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Sue Ellen Alicehouse, 6408 Solar Ct., President of Skyview South Subdivision, stated they do have a number of issue about the traffic in Skyview South. As stated, the City does not maintain their streets, but their development will greatly impact their streets. Their primary concern is cut through traffic on Constellation with resulting safety issues, speed issues for people who do not live in the neighborhood and street deterioration. The neighborhood has conducted their own traffic count, and was sorry to say that there was not enormous amounts of cut through, but will continue to try to prove it. They would like to restrict construction traffic to Skyway and College. They would like to restrict delivery trucks from driving on neighborhood streets, that includes Saturn Drive, and Skyview north. They do think Hugh M. Woods will be a good neighbor, but are concerned with traffic. She offered a right -out only as a possible solution to help reduce traffic. The neighborhood was also concerned with waiting for Trilby to develop until the Del Webb property develops. The neighborhood also has concerns with the slope on Skyway when it is icy. She felt this is a real safety concern and would like something to guarantee safety. She also questioned whether there would be sidewalks and would like a response. Heather Holeman, lives in Huntington Hills and wondered why Skyway was closed on the east side of College. Her question was when would Skyway be developed. Dave Preston, lives in Skyview South. He thinks that Hugh M. Woods has done an excellent job on the aesthetics of the building. His concern was also traffic. Al Bascillia, lives in Skyview. His concern was also the slope of the hill on Skyway. He was also concerned with the large truck traffic and did not think the trucks could turn onto Skyway without interfering with traffic. Mr. Bascillia was also concerned with the access on Skyway and thought it should be through the Hickory Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 28 House and if not would cause a lot of accidents. He spoke about cut through traffic on Constellation. He urged the board to reject this application and felt it was dangerous and out of order. Curt Nemeyer, speaking for Deli Works. Their biggest concern is access to the property. He felt they did not consider the access on the frontage road and address it to Deli -Works until about 10 days ago. He pointed out the alternative accesses they have a choice of. They did not believe the developer and the City's choice of a solution to the problem was the correct one, but the easiest one. They did not want to give up the property to grant an easement for traffic. He spoke his concerns with traffic on the frontage road and the flow patterns. He thought there should be a better solution looked at. David Osborn, representing MSP Companies, which is Huntington Hills. Their concerns are with the Skyway intersection and the alignment, which might compound the problems they have already on trying to work out a satisfactory access agreement for the Huntington Hills development. They are concerned that the intersection has not been given enough study and that the Skyway East problem solution should be an intrical part of this development. Chris Hartman, lives on Constellation, stressed previous points on traffic on and around Trilby with developments going in. She also has concerns with the slope on Skyway Drive and ice being a safety factor. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION CLOSED Chairman Clements asked if sidewalks would be provided with this development and also asked the issue of Skyway East development be addressed by Transportation. Tom Vosburg replied that College Avenue was a major arterial and standards require 7 foot detached walks and they will be required along the frontage of this development. Regarding Skyway to the east and why it is closed off. Hugh M. Woods does not own that parcel and it is currently unclear who owns the property where the road is barricaded off. The developer of Huntington Hills states an interest and actually did the closure. There are also other parties that also have an interest and claim access rights to that. There are efforts being initiated to try to reopen it. The City is not in a position to require an order that the barricades be removed, but there are efforts underway to examine the whole issue. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 29 Chairman Clements asked if that was because it is owned privately. Mr. Vosburg replied, yes, it is private property. Regarding when it will go through, further development of Huntington Hills has been conditioned on that connection being made. They are working with adjoining property owners, as well as the developer of Huntington Hills to resolve issues that need to be resolved in order to put the road through. Staff is concerned that the design of the road on the east side of College be consistent and coordinated with the design of the road on the west, so they are working with those parties to resolve the design issues. He would expect that the road would be completed soon, but it will depend on when an agreement is reached with all the parties here concerned. The construction of the road will be the responsibility of the developer of Huntington Hills to complete as part of their next phase of development. Chairman Clements asked about the amount of trailers that will be entering and exiting Hugh M. Woods per day and where will they be entering and exiting. Barry Hilton, Hugh M. Woods, stated there are distribution trucks that come once a week, and then 3 or 4 vendor trucks a day. They would be coming from the south and would turn in at the south entrance, across the front and into the yard area. If they would be coming from the north, they would be coming from Skyway, into their entrance, and then into the yard area. The receiving and loading dock area is located in the back of the store. Chairman Clements asked about the weight of the trucks and would the road in the condition it is in be able to withstand the weight of the trucks. Mr. Hilton replied that the trucks would be the standard over the road trucks which are about 70,000 pounds. Part of the improvements to Skyway would be to bring them up to City standards and would take truck traffic. Member Fontane asked if the access on College would be a right- in/right-out and would they not be able to access that from the south. Mr. Hilton replied that it was right-in/right-out and would enter on Skyway where there is a left turn pocket. The trucks coming from the north could turn either way. Member Cottier asked about the loading facility being at the front of the building so no more access on Skyway is required, and was he saying that was not correct? Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 30 Mr. Hilton replied that that comment was directed to the fact that the trucks would leave Skyway and enter their facility and the loading dock is located in the compound and not to the back and exposed. Member Bell asked to see a slide of the overall area. She asked about the South College Access Control Plan and that Skyway and Trilby Road were the only two signalized intersections in the quadrant and she thought the ODP showed another signal somewhere south of Skyway. Mr. Vosburg replied that in the South College Access Plan, that location was identified as a possible future signalized intersection. It is planned to be full movement with the possibility of being signalized. The applicant in their traffic study, made the case for signalization of that intersection. Whether or not that intersection will be signalized will depend on when it meets signal warrants. Member Bell asked what the traffic count was for the entire OPD? What would it be when it is totally built out? Matt Delich, prepared the traffic study for this development, as well as the Timan PUD. He stated that the Hugh M. Woods site will generate 1,700 to 1,800 vehicle trip ends per day. Parcel A is assumed to be retail/office and service uses and will generate about 5,200 vehicle trip ends per day. Parcel B, the northwest corner of Trilby and 287 is assumed to be retail and will generate about 7,000 trip ends per day. Parcel C, the west end of the site is assumed to be office/retail and will generate about 2,700 trip ends per day. Totalling up to 16,800 trip ends per day on this site. The intersections will meet the design criteria for the City of Fort Collins. Member Bell asked if down the road, would there be additional improvements to Skyway. Mr. Delich replied that Skyway Drive from College west approximately 300 feet will be improved significantly from what it is now. In the east bound direction, at a minimum, will have three lanes approaching College Avenue and one lane west bound. At the intersection into the site on Skyway, it will have two lanes west bound, one to the neighborhood to the west and the left turnlane into this site and at the same location, two east bound lanes. It will be a four lane cross-section. Member Fontane asked about the safety and the slope of the hill and traffic coming out and what is going on with the frontage road. She wondered if the road could be signed into the neighborhood with signs stating no truck traffic. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 31 Mr. Delich replied that it will not be ideal for trucks to be going that way. A solution would be to sign it, and it is not uncommon for locations that go into residential areas. Also understand that the traffic to and from Hugh M. Woods will have very convenient access both from and to College. He agrees that very little of the Hugh M. Woods traffic will use the neighborhood streets. He felt that the ideal solution to this situation is to reroute the frontage road around the Hickory House. Member Fontane asked about the safety on the hill. Mr. Delich replied that he calculated the contour at 5.89,5 That is within Fort Collins standards and it is steep. He felt that the site distance was adequate and it would operate as it does today. Member Strom asked about a suggestion in regard to the curb cut out of Hugh M. Woods being a right -out only and would like a reaction to that. Mr. Delich replied that denying that movement for automobile traffic was not reasonable and that was telling the neighborhood they can't shop at Hugh M. Woods and get back to their neighborhood. Mr. Vosburg added that he also did not think that trying to control the exit from Hugh M. Woods to being a right -out only. This is only the first pad of a major shopping center. It would not be unrealistic to expect there to be a grocery store or other retail in this center as well. Member Strom asked about semi -trailers making turns at this intersection. Mr. Vosburg replied that the intersection would be designed and built according to City standards and those City standards incorporate and support semi movements. Member Strom asked for information about the brick wall surrounding the site and wanted information about what the wall will look like. Mr. Sell replied that in the areas of residential development, there would be more effort to create a potential detailing on the wall. It will be a concrete block wall that would have some sort of attractive cap on it and may have vertical columns. Member Strom asked about the rendering of the building and the golden canopy color, but photographs from some other location was bright yellow. He would like more detail about the color on the building. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 32 Mr. Hilton, Hugh M. Woods, responded the main building itself is split -rib type block. There is a red band that raps the building at the 12 foot elevation that is painted onto the building, a red color. Around the front entry is a common brick in a brown color. The canopies on the front entrance and at the garden center are yellow. Member Strom asked if that was the color in the photographs. Mr. Hilton replied yes. Member Strom asked about existing trees on the site and would they continue to be irrigated. Mr. Sell replied those trees would be removed. There is a cluster of trees in the wetland area that are being supplied with natural runoff and underground water. They have to do a wetland mitigation plan for both on the site and off the site and would be addressing those. Member Carnes asked about the canopies being occupied by people and wondered about that square footage and how it related to the big box criteria. Mr. Sell replied they were 73,500 and expected to be within the 80,000 s.f. even if the canopy is included. Member Fontane asked about the road system that goes to the east side of the parking lot and would it have to be moved so there is not the same situation as to the north on the frontage road. Mr. Sell replied that the difference was that it was a right- in/right-out only. It was not a big deal to move it back. Member Cottier asked about a proposed alley to take up less of Skyway. Is there an alley and what is the function of it? Mr. Vosburg thought that it was a typo in the transcription of the neighborhood meeting notes. It should read "opposite" the alley. Member Cottier asked if the wall on the north side would be 14 feet? Mr. Sell replied yes, the height of the structure from grade is 14 feet. Member Cottier asked what the minimum of any one point in the wall was? Mr. Sell replied 6 feet. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 33 Member Cottier asked about the point chart for Auto Related/Roadside Commercial. She asked why the second criteria regarding outside storage was checked no. Mr. Olt interpreted the meaning of the criteria as being related to auto parts and repair. All of the storage of lumber will take place in an enclosed wall area, not a structure itself. Member Cottier asked about them getting the maximum points for energy conservation and wondered what happens if they don't come through with all the energy conservation measures? Mr. Olt replied they are making a commitment to do that since the point charts are evaluated at preliminary, they have to assume based on the absolute criteria they have outlined to gain the points, the use of method 2 requires that the final approved PUD plan and construction plans submitted to the Building Department must specify all of the Energy Conservation measures which points have been awarded. Deputy City Attorney Eckman added that if it is an after the fact occurrence where all the plans show and it is approved on final and they don't actually don't do it on the ground, then under the LDGS, they would be subject to criminal liability or suit for injunctive relief, because they have failed to comply with the term, condition, or limitations contained on the plan. Member Cottier asked about the plan presented at the second neighborhood meeting reflecting revisions in response to neighborhood concerns. She would like to know what those revisions were. Mr. Sell replied that the most significant were setbacks from 30 feet to 80 feet for buffering. Also, the entry shifted 45 feet to the west. Member Carnes asked about the project meeting All Development Criteria A2.1 regarding bicycle transportation, could that be explained. Also, A2.4 which has to do with the safe, efficient, convenient and attractive for all modes of transportation, he would like an opinion of whether it is feasible for this project as proposed to meet A2.4. Mr. Vosburg replied both criteria are Land Development Guidance System criteria and the LDGS establishes a higher standard to measure transportation and circulation issues against than traditional traffic engineering and the adopted street standards. When evaluating the safety of vehicular movements and standard functionality test, there are clearly a variety of solutions that can meet that standard. He felt it was a grey area and a hard call Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 34 regarding efficiency and convenience. He felt that it was the board's call of what is the appropriate level of convenience and efficiency the board feels it needs to meet to be consistent with the boards interpretation and application of the LDGS. In his professional opinion he believes there are design solutions that can be articulated for this project that can get cars in and out of this site safety. Member Carnes asked about criteria A2.1 not being met. Mr. Vosburg replied that in order to answer yes to both of those All Development Criteria, the issues of the design of the College/Skyway intersection need to be resolved. Chairman Clements asked about criteria A2.7 and her concern was the mass of the building. She also has a concern with the color, and she would like to see something more in earthtones. Mr. Hilton responded this was a building they use everywhere in the country. The colors do match their corporate logo. He stated they could consider other colors if they had to. Also the mass of the building could be broken up. Member Walker suggested breaking up the mass, stepping the toll booths back, changing of some of the colors, and the right- in/right-out access at the south end be relocated. Member Strom asked about the project getting 0 points for contiguity. Could he explain why they did not get any points for contiguity when they only need 1/6. Planner Olt replied that in the LDGS it states that it must be contiguous to urban development. By definition in the LDGS existing development shall mean any subdivision in the City which has been approved and recorded. This site is totally surrounded by County approved and developed residential and commercial. Member Strom moved for approval of Hugh M. Woods citing the Findings of Fact and Conclusions in the staff report as revised with the three conditions as indicated in the staff report plus a condition that the driveway design at the southeast corner of the parking lot be revised prior to final. Condition 5, that staff investigate weight restrictions west bound from the site or other means to restrict truck traffic through the neighborhood to the west. Six, that architectural detailing for the masonry walls be provided to the board for review at final, also, that additional relief on the east wall be provided, and the colors be toned down, the colors are too intense for the standard they would like to see, and that an example pallet be presented at final. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 35 Member Fontane seconded the motion. Chief Planner Blanchard offered a modification to condition one that would instead of relating directly to the realignment design of the frontage road that instead it say "that the final plan shall show such improvements to Skyway Drive and College Avenue intersections as will render the intersection safe and in conformance with the LDGS Criteria A2.1, A2.4, and A3.2 as applicable. Member Strom accepted with an additional stipulation that the board believes the best solution is to revise the intersection of the frontage road further to the west and would like to strongly encouraged trying to work that possibility if at all feasible. Member Fontane accepted as the second. Chairman Clements added that it would be nice if the frontage road that is vacated could go away and landscaping be provided. Member Cottier stated that she would be supporting the motion because of all the design conditions. She thought that the landscaping shown does help to make this project workable. She is also still concerned with the way the wall will look. She also was concerned that there was no buffer to the south and hoped that it does not become a problem when the property to the south is developed. Member Carnes stated he would not be supporting this motion. In his judgement he has heard nothing that convinced him that the situation will be safe, efficient and convenient for all modes of transportation, Criteria A2.4. Member Bell stated she was concerned that this project does not meet the spirit and intent of the superstore moratorium. She did feel uncomfortable with slipping and going around that issue. She also felt that people in that area want a South College Area Plan that would help address some of these issues on development. She will not be supporting this motion citing criteria A2.7, A2.1, A2.3, and A3.1. Chairman Clements major concern was the traffic problems at this site. She believed that no matter what goes on this site, there would be problems until the traffic is worked out, because of the contour of the land and because of the hill on Skyway. She will be supporting the project because of the motion being amended and at final if she does not feel that the traffic and issues stated by Member Strom specifically cited from the LDGS are not met to make her feel that this is a safe, convenient, and effective way for traffic to get around, she would not approve the final. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 14, 1994 Page 36 The motion passed 4-2 with Members Carnes and Bell voting in the negative. There was no other business. The meeting was adjourned at 12:40 p.m.